Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, 9 September 2026)
| Date | 9 September 2026 |
|---|---|
| Court | CFI |
| Division | Mannheim (DE) Local Division |
| Type of action | Infringement Action |
| Case number(s) | UPC_CFI_1570/2025 |
| Registry reference | UPC-CFI-0001570/2025 |
| Parties | Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) v. Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co., Ltd. , Tecno Mobile Limited, Infinix Mobility Limited, Tekpoint Gmb… |
Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry
Dhenne Avocats represents claimants and defendants in European patent disputes before the Unified Patent Court, including the Paris divisions.
Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026
Our analysis
Summary
The Mannheim Local Division allows Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) to withdraw its infringement action against Shenzhen Transsion Holdings and eight other defendants on EP 4 277 422, following a settlement with Transsion. It applies the 2026 version of Rule 370.9 RoP to the reimbursement request, although the action was filed earlier, and reduces the rate to 35%. The decision is of interest to parties to litigation campaigns run before several divisions.
Question
Which version of Rule 370.9 RoP governs a reimbursement request filed in 2026 in an action brought earlier, and may the regular rate be reduced?
Decision
The withdrawal is allowed, defendant 7’s silence being treated as implicit consent, and no cost decision is required (paragraph 1). The 2026 version of Rule 370.9 RoP applies, with a regular rate of 50% rather than 60%, the judge-rapporteur reduces it to 35% under Rule 370.9(e) RoP, citing among other things the intertwined structure of the requests, coordination between divisions, a complex confidentiality regime, a postponed preliminary objection on the FRAND-related claims and the separation of two patents, the rate being in line with the 25% applied in The Hague lead cases (paragraph 3). The value in dispute is set at EUR 4,000,000 (paragraph 4) and the reimbursement at EUR 12,950, on the fee scale in force before 1 January 2026 (paragraph 5).
Key points for practice
- The amended Rule 370.9 RoP governs reimbursement requests filed after 31 December 2025, even for earlier actions, while the amount of the fees follows the scale in force when the action was filed (paragraphs 3 and 5).
- The reduction for exceptional circumstances is assessed across the whole litigation campaign, the decision referring to the rate applied by The Hague Local Division (paragraph 3).
Provisions applied
- Rules of Procedure
- Rules 265, 370.9 and 370.11
- Case law cited
- Court of Appeal, 28 May 2025, UPC_CoA_808/2024, on the absence of a cost decision, HUROM v NUC, Court of Appeal, 26 May 2026, on the application of the amended Rule 370.9 RoP, Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) v Shenzhen Transsion, The Hague Local Division, 26 August 2026, on the 25% rate.
Prepared by Dhenne Avocats from the official decision, consulted on 10 October 2026. The database is updated every week, on Friday. Only the official text is authoritative.
Going further
Lexicon: Standard essential patent (SEP), FRAND offer and counter-offer, Injunctions and standard essential patents.
Dhenne Avocats blog: FRAND at the UPC: What the Court Has Decided, What Remains Open.
Publications by Matthieu Dhenne: Munich’s FRAND Guidelines: A Compass Drawn Too Finely, Tesla v. InterDigital and the FRAND Undertaking Inside the Pool (Kluwer Patent Blog).
Source and translations
- Official source
- Unified Patent Court registry link recorded in the record
- Original language
- not recorded
- Translation available
- no translation recorded the firm’s French record is a summary, not a translation
- Date checked
- not recorded
Follow this case
Proceedings, related decisions, appeals, parties and patents as recorded in the registry and in the Dhenne Avocats corpus. Each link states its source.
Parties
- claimantTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ)24 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
- defendantShenzhen Transsion Holdings Co., Ltd.14 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
- defendantTecno Mobile Limited10 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
- defendantInfinix Mobility Limited7 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
- defendantTekpoint GmbFollow this party
Decisions in the same proceedings and documented appeals
What the record states
- Nature of the act
- Infringement Action
- Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary)
- Le désistement est autorisé sans décision sur les frais. La règle 370.9 dans sa version de 2026 s’applique à la demande de remboursement et le taux ordinaire de 50 % est réduit à 35 % pour circonstances exceptionnelles.
- Appeal
- No appeal documented in the corpus, this does not mean that no appeal was lodged.
- Instance
- First-instance decision, whether it has become final is not recorded.
Patents mentioned
EP 4 277 422mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent
Related decisions cited in the analyses
- Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, 26 August 2026) cited in this record
- Hurom v NUC Electronics (CoA, 26 May 2026) cited in this record
Patents and standards
| Publication | Role in the dispute | Family | Standard and declaration | Pool | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EP 4 277 422 | Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) Also mentioned in 1 other decision(s): Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Verifone (CFI, UPC_CFI_661/2026, 14 | not recorded | not recorded | not recorded | Espacenet links not checked mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis |
Receive an alert
Weekly summary of new records and substantive updates matching what you follow. Address confirmed by email, unsubscribe at any time, one email per week even where several of your follows match.